Science-based Targets for Nature are Critical to the Climate Solution

Erin Billman

A systemic challenge like the climate crisis requires systemic solutions. Recent science has made clear that solving climate change is not a 2050 imperative but one for today—the world will need to be well on the path to mid-century carbon-neutrality within the next nine years if we are going to hold global average temperatures to no more than 1.5-degrees Celsius of warming. To meet this level of urgency, communities, companies, and investors are calculating and adopting science-based targets. Science-based targets (SBTs) are measurable, actionable, and time-bound objectives, based on the best available science. For climate, science-based targets give companies a clearly-defined pathway to reduce emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goals. For nature, they will allow businesses to align their strategies with Earth’s limits and societal sustainability goals, like the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals.

Already, more than 1,200 companies are now committed to set science-based climate targets because they see the future is net-zero. These targets ensure their business strategies incorporate emissions reductions at an ambitious enough pace and scale to play their part in limiting global temperature rise in line with science.


Now we need to add nature into the equation. Nature needs protecting in its own right—as the provider of everything humans depend on to live our lives and run our businesses. And, critically, we can’t reach our climate goals without simultaneously addressing nature loss.


Building on the momentum of science-based targets for climate, the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) was set up to develop an integrated solution to the nature and climate crises. The SBTN aims to break down silos between organizations, issues, and approaches in order to solve the interrelated challenges facing the global commons: climate change and the degradation of ecosystems critical for human well-being.


The SBTN is developing science-based targets for nature for companies, along with both climate and nature targets for cities. The nature targets for companies and cities will assess their impacts and dependencies on nature - by which we mean all non-human living entities - and in turn their interaction with other living or non-living physical entities and processes. This definition, from  the IPBES Global Assessment 2019, recognizes that all of these interactions bind humans to nature and beyond that, the interactions between species, soils, rivers or nutrients bind them to each other.


Addressing these two issues simultaneously will be the most efficient and effective way for business to take action on both nature loss and climate change—issues that have been defined as the greatest risks and opportunities of our time. The World Economic Forum’s Future of Nature and Business report estimates that nature-positive transitions could generate up to US$10.1 trillion in annual business value and create 395 million jobs by 2030.


Our approach at SBTN is a consolidated and comprehensive one. The targets address the interconnection of issue areas, allowing companies to take action on multiple issues at once and avoid creating new problems. When designed and implemented correctly, SBTs for nature will help companies to resolve interrelated climate and nature risks, including creating resilience to climate hazards, such as heat waves, floods, and droughts. As operations reorient to meet these targets, they can help conserve freshwater resources and increase water security, regenerate land systems, support healthy, diverse oceans and conserve biodiversity, and prevent species extinction.


The SBTN’s approach need not be duplicative nor require increased monitoring and reporting burden for companies. For many, the approach will build on existing resources and tools and, therefore, consolidate actions that companies are already taking. It draws heavily on the Natural Capital Protocol, existing practices in land-conversion-free supply chains, and lifecycle (impact) assessment (LC(I)A). In addition, it recognizes the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) and SBTs for climate; contextual water targets; context-based targets more broadly; CDP; Global Reporting Initiative (GRI); and the Corporate Ecosystem Services Review as valuable for helping companies collect and organize data for SBT setting.


We will not limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C without protecting and restoring nature. Now is the time to bring every possible solution to bear. Companies need to take responsibility for their own impacts and dependencies on nature alongside cutting emissions in line with science. Buying carbon credits for projects outside of a company’s own sphere of influence will be nowhere near enough to achieve either their climate or nature goals.


The SBTN’s initial guidance on science-based targets (SBTs) for nature,  published last year, is a first step toward integrated SBTs for all aspects of nature: biodiversity, climate, freshwater, land, and ocean. Developing further enterprise methodologies to use SBTs for nature are well underway. These will enable voluntary action for nature and climate, in turn enabling stronger policy as governments gain confidence to set stronger climate and nature policies.


We invite the ISSP community to get in touch with us to begin your journey of setting SBTs for nature as integral to reaching global climate goals. You can also learn how to join our Corporate Engagement Program. In addition, we invite the ISSP community to join us in co-designing our targets and helping us to road-test them for impact, cost-effectiveness and user-experience. Together, we can build an integrated solution to the nature and climate crises.


Photo: Gary Cunliffe


About the Author:

Erin Billman
Executive Director, Science Based Targets Network

Read perspectives from the ISSP blog

By Jacqueline Kerr, PHD May 27, 2026
May 2026 We spend enormous energy telling people what needs to change, and very little time thinking about how change actually happens. Most sustainability efforts inside organizations are built around the individual. Convince the right person. Model the right behavior. Win the argument in the room. And to be fair, that approach gets things moving. Until it doesn't. The real barrier isn't information. It isn't even intent. It's the conditions we create for people to change together. What I'm seeing in the most effective organizations isn't individual champions doing heroic work. It's something more structural: well-designed groups where people shift together, hold each other accountable, and build something that doesn't collapse when one person leaves the room.
By Nitesh Dullabh April 28, 2026
April 2026 I walked away from a recent webinar with a lingering thought: we’ve spent years improving supply chains, but very little time truly rethinking them. Most of the systems we rely on today were built for efficiency - to move goods faster, cheaper, at scale. And to be fair, they’ve done that remarkably well. But they were never designed for the complexity we’re now facing: climate volatility, geopolitical and tariff uncertainty, water stress, soil degradation, and widening inequities across supply chains. So what do we do? We add layers - more audits, more reporting, more standards. Necessary? Yes. Sufficient? Not really. The deeper issue is not performance - it’s creating healthy conditions for design and structure. What I’m seeing instead, and what I believe is the real shift underway, is the move toward regenerative partnerships . Not transactional relationships, but systems of collaboration that are designed to endure, adapt, and regenerate value over time through and with relational relationships. 
By By Amy Hall, MSc, Education Lead, TripleWin Advisory March 23, 2026
March 23, 2026 I spend a lot of time thinking about how we teach sustainability. Not just the what , but the how and why . At TripleWin Advisory , a woman-founded, -owned, and -led sustainability consultancy and registered public benefit company, we believe real progress on circularity requires more than good intentions. It requires practitioners who are genuinely equipped to act. That conviction is what led us to develop two courses now available through ISSP: Cultivate and Mitigate . Both courses have since been adopted by universities and are reaching sustainability students across the country. Knowing what went into building them makes me want to share the story behind each one. Mitigate: Built From Practice, Not Textbooks Mitigate was created from hands-on work with partners tackling one of the most pressing issues in sustainability: food waste. Reducing food waste is consistently ranked among the highest-impact solutions to climate change, and yet it remains one of the most underfunded and under-addressed areas in the field. TripleWin Advisory has worked with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Pacific Coast Food Waste Commitment (PCFWC) , a public-private partnership whose frameworks were ultimately adopted at the national level. Those assets, that research, and those hard-won insights form the backbone of Mitigate. When we talk about food waste reduction strategies in this course, we're drawing on frameworks that have been tested and refined in real supply chains and policy environments. For learners who want to do this work professionally, that grounding matters. The University of Wisconsin has integrated Mitigate into their undergraduate and graduate sustainability programs, which speaks to what the course offers academically: rigorous, applied content that bridges the classroom and the field.
More blog posts